+ Register

[Lung Yeh]

Perhaps it would not be incorrect to say that both MM and BS are equally important to be a success. Like the football team example. You cannot win without both good attack and good defense. Similarly in a manufacturing business, you need both the manufacturing side and the marketing side to be good in order to succeed.

[Garfield]

@Lung Yeh: dear sir, really spot on!

Perhaps it would not be incorrect to say that both MM and BS are equally important to be a success. Like the football team example. You cannot win without both good attack and good defense. Similarly in a manufacturing business, you need both the manufacturing side and the marketing side to be good in order to succeed.

[vo rogue]

If you don't manage your money,
You won't have any.

[Gizmotron]

@Gizmo : But if you have to choose between those two, which one will you consider more important?

Just pick Red or Black, Banker or Player, no grey shaded area.

Please.

Thank you.

I'll cooperate, but first off, I did make a selection. I selected both. I don't have to choose one over the other.

Having said that, and because I have to, my strategy is MM, it is supported by the data that is gathered from my bet selection process. So I lean MM even though my vote originally was cast as bet selection. So you can change one vote for bet selection and change it to MM.

[HunchBacShrimp]

Incomprehensible!

I would expect Bet Selection to be the number one choice among NON gamblers. Without knowing any better, non gamblers just like beginning gamblers first thought is to a bet that wins more often than it loses. But as soon as the beginning gambler learns, and more importantly, understands what the HE and negative expectation is, then it should dawn on them that it is all about MM.

There is no negative expectation mathematically woven into sports play. Let's skip horse racing and the way sports books are set up. So, ABSOLUTELY NOT, are they both equally important.

To reiterate. All bet selections resolve to a 50/50 state minus the house edge. B or P only, TBL, OTBL, FLD, OLD, column methods, flipping a coin, color the last card, score of winning hand all produce identical W/L registries. In the long run, and in the short run. They will all perform wonderfully and tank just as badly today, and ten weeks from now.

Even if you found the holy grail of bet selections with a predictable W/L registry. You would still be playing a negative expectation game and NEED to employ the proper MM to overcome the HE.

There really is no argument for BS.

What's a bad bet selection? Which BS produces only 1% less wins than its expectation? What BS under performs against its opposite? None of them. ( skip telling me B, commission must be considered, or DP in craps, there is a push)

I've tried to think of one myself. I figured the worst BS for Baccarat is to bet for all B's to be single, forcing me to bet P. And for all P's to at least double. Again forcing me to bet P. Sounds like an awful BS. Knowing that B will double more often than singling, and that P will single more often than doubling. So, consider the opposite, betting that all B's double, that all P's single. Forcing all bets on Banker. Equally unattractive imo. I've got B&M Baccarat cards showing both selections not just tanking horribly, but tanking exactly the same way any other BS can and will tank.

BS can offer no advantage. MM is all that is left.

HBS

PS. I cannot engage in an argument with the roulette people. Law of the Third, hot numbers, cold numbers, cycles withing cycles....this is all outside my area of experience. However, I cannot be faulted for trusting in the math of the game without personally having played it.

HBS

[Jimske]

I'll cooperate, but first off, I did make a selection. I selected both. I don't have to choose one over the other.

Having said that, and because I have to, my strategy is MM, it is supported by the data that is gathered from my bet selection process. So I lean MM even though my vote originally was cast as bet selection. So you can change one vote for bet selection and change it to MM.

This is a funny thread.  Perhaps there is some confusion or disagreement.  In my mind if one chooses bet selection it means that they believe that there exists a positive prediction method to win more than lose.  Now it doesn't matter whether that is one such bet or a specific number of series or trials.  There is no need for MM if one has a winning bet selection - just make the bet according to the prediction.  However, that prediction must then be quantified so one can measure the exact expected positive value.

Just to be clear.  My WR is about 52.5%.  But I still cannot predict or tell you why or how to duplicate it.  So I expect over time it will fall back to the EV.
*****************
As I'm typing I see HBS has posted.  He states it far better than I could.  The proof as he suggests is select any two bet selections and see if one actually loses or wins more than the other.  They don't.

[Gizmotron]

I'll tell you why I first voted BS.  It all comes down to timing. House advantage depends on being effective do to timing. The casinos believe that the longer you stay in your seat, the better their chance of beating you is. They don't like players that effectively make use of their time.

I attack when, and only when, I'm in a winning state. It gets called other things here at this forum but what I just said is clear. Knowing when to pounce is bet selection, like it or not. Killing the casino during a very rare elegant pattern is not money management. The house advantage steps out for a smoke during that phenomenon, and so does all losing bets. Remember this, "Effectiveness rewards the prepared mind?"

[Jimske]

I'll tell you why I first voted BS.  It all comes down to timing. House advantage depends on being effective do to timing. The casinos believe that the longer you stay in your seat, the better their chance of beating you is. They don't like players that effectively make use of their time.

Okay so isn't timing a predictive element?

[gr8player]

Garfield, I just placed my vote for "Bet Selection".

I am of the opinion that there isn't enough money in the world for the player that can't seem to put their chips onto the correct (read: winning) circle on the felt.

My bet selection process has proved its worthiness to me many times over; and, frankly, all I do is trend the current results of the shoe.  No mysticism there whatsoever.  Just an unwavering faith in my ability to read a shoe as it unfolds and as it twists and turns.

As so I vote for "Bet Selection".

That doesn't mean that "Money Management" isn't important; it surely is.  But my bets are, for the most part, rather constricted in nature, and so my money management is more about strategic "exiting" points as much as anything else.  I'll seek to "walk a winner" as often as possible, regardless the amount.  Ain't no money management plan in the world better than that one.

So, bottom line, I trend for a few wins (mixing in a few parlays here and there), lock up my profits and protect (and prevent) too much "give-back" before I "walk the win" to the cashier.

But I couldn't rely much on those "few wins" if i didn't have a solid bet selection process in place; and so I do.

And, as always, I wish it for all of you.

[21 Aces]

This  whole argument depends on how effective you are at each.  Someone that states money management isn't assuming they are to be a 1-3 on a scale of 1-10 in bet selection and vice versa.

I said it again and I'll say it before; betting flat don't feed the bulldog, hey hey!!!!

^This is what I kept saying to myself all last night.  FEED THE BULLDOG.  Everyone needs to step up and play to win with a result that matters.

[Garfield]

As Gizmo changed his vote and I don't know how to change the poll's result so I guess I have to wait for BS to reach 11 or the MM reach 10.

[Gizmotron]

Okay so isn't timing a predictive element?

Not really, in my opinion, it's just a guess. It's only backed by an occurring coincidence that happens to be temporarily favorable. They can't make you flat bet. You can back off or attack. They have to stand there and take it. You can hit them with a pillow when they are in casino streak. You can hit them with a sledge hammer when they are in favorable for me streak. That's why both BS & MM equally matter.

[Garfield]

I've changed my mind and lock the poll. So the true result is 9 votes for BS and 8 votes for MM. I don't have to write down the math because it means nothing.

First thank you for all the member who has vote and give their opinion.

Frankly I felt like I was asking which come first, the egg or the chicken? 

I have been in situation when my losses are greater than my winning, but still I made profit.

Also been in situation when my win greater than the lost but I break even or even losing.

So, frankly I have to admit that this two are equally important. It's like one is your right hand and other is the left. Surely we could survive with only one of them, but two are merrier right? 

Other thing I notice that just like everything else, there will be always two side of it. Yin Yang, Black White, Good Bad, Banker Player??

But one thing in common I safely assume that everyone or most of the member will agree. That is we try (or wish?) to win, no matter how. This two only one of so many tools we choose to acomplish the goals.

Thank you again for the participation.

[Jimske]

Not really, in my opinion, it's just a guess. It's only backed by an occurring coincidence that happens to be temporarily favorable. They can't make you flat bet. You can back off or attack. They have to stand there and take it. You can hit them with a pillow when they are in casino streak. You can hit them with a sledge hammer when they are in favorable for me streak. That's why both BS & MM equally matter.

Just a guess, right.  I keep on harping on this for a good reason IMO.  This doesn't mean that MM is not important to win but the only reason MM is important is BECAUSE BS is just a guess!  If it wasn't then I as well as the Gr8 one and Asymbac would be most happy to send Lung the rules of the game and Lung would then easily win in perpetuity.  I'm pretty sure Lung would compensate us for that information.  But it would all be short lived because pretty soon the whole world would know and the casinos would either eliminate the game or take some kind or preferential action to thwart.

May I suggest that bet selection means you know the long run future outcome of any next decision or series of next decisions and you can measure it. So if you cannot measure it then you are just guessing.

I'm finished with it.

[Garfield]

One more thought of mine,

As many stated that any "mechanical" BS will eventually lost itlr, wouldn't be fair to say that any "mechanical" MM will suffer the same too?

The quest for the holy grail often reffered to BS method, could it be found in MM method? Is there a holy grail for MM?

IMO, I don't think so.

In BS,the factor that affect the most is to have a BS that win more than it lose. Maybe that how we could measure our BS performance in the particular shoe.

For MM, what is the factor to measure? Do we measure our MM by observe how many LIAR it could handle?